)]}'
{"/COMMIT_MSG":[{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"7db08ea3d105154715ad5c90d0d94e85015e0bec","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":36,"context_line":"ComputeNode fields if the configured ratios are not the 0.0 default."},{"line_number":37,"context_line":""},{"line_number":38,"context_line":"Change-Id: I43a23a3290db0c835fed01b8d6a38962dc61adce"},{"line_number":39,"context_line":"Related-Bug: #1789654"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-gerrit-commit-message","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_89b72d3b","line":39,"range":{"start_line":39,"start_character":0,"end_line":39,"end_character":11},"updated":"2018-08-31 20:40:36.000000000","message":"This should probably be Closes-Bug","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"}],"nova/compute/resource_tracker.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"cf7d5981cb87e8d178df250316e945a8bed7e533","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":626,"context_line":"        # resetting the ComputeNode fields to 0.0 because that will make"},{"line_number":627,"context_line":"        # the _resource_change method think something changed when really it"},{"line_number":628,"context_line":"        # didn\u0027t."},{"line_number":629,"context_line":"        # TODO(mriedem): Will this break any scenarios where an operator is"},{"line_number":630,"context_line":"        # trying to *reset* the allocation ratios by changing config from"},{"line_number":631,"context_line":"        # non-0.0 back to 0.0? Maybe we should only do this if the fields on"},{"line_number":632,"context_line":"        # the ComputeNode object are not already set."},{"line_number":633,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":634,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":635,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_d14e466d","line":632,"range":{"start_line":629,"start_character":0,"end_line":632,"end_character":53},"updated":"2018-08-30 22:12:29.000000000","message":"is that really a thing?","commit_id":"0a8559fada4d263f69690d17e9ac4ca721fab52b"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"e776b3201bc260f1bc50d02e9fe5d32455bbe67f","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":626,"context_line":"        # resetting the ComputeNode fields to 0.0 because that will make"},{"line_number":627,"context_line":"        # the _resource_change method think something changed when really it"},{"line_number":628,"context_line":"        # didn\u0027t."},{"line_number":629,"context_line":"        # TODO(mriedem): Will this break any scenarios where an operator is"},{"line_number":630,"context_line":"        # trying to *reset* the allocation ratios by changing config from"},{"line_number":631,"context_line":"        # non-0.0 back to 0.0? Maybe we should only do this if the fields on"},{"line_number":632,"context_line":"        # the ComputeNode object are not already set."},{"line_number":633,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":634,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":635,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_f148225d","line":632,"range":{"start_line":629,"start_character":0,"end_line":632,"end_character":53},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_d14e466d","updated":"2018-08-30 22:13:28.000000000","message":"Not sure, but I think you could do it today based on how the code worked before this.","commit_id":"0a8559fada4d263f69690d17e9ac4ca721fab52b"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"d153bbbea5d8aaa2570172e3171ce5c22804eebb","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":626,"context_line":"        # resetting the ComputeNode fields to 0.0 because that will make"},{"line_number":627,"context_line":"        # the _resource_change method think something changed when really it"},{"line_number":628,"context_line":"        # didn\u0027t."},{"line_number":629,"context_line":"        # TODO(mriedem): Will this break any scenarios where an operator is"},{"line_number":630,"context_line":"        # trying to *reset* the allocation ratios by changing config from"},{"line_number":631,"context_line":"        # non-0.0 back to 0.0? Maybe we should only do this if the fields on"},{"line_number":632,"context_line":"        # the ComputeNode object are not already set."},{"line_number":633,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":634,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":635,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_183ff0b5","line":632,"range":{"start_line":629,"start_character":0,"end_line":632,"end_character":53},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_f148225d","updated":"2018-08-31 14:50:29.000000000","message":"Having said that, it was supported before, and I could see people wanting/needing to do it. Otherwise I think the only way you can fix that is either (1) deleting the nova-compute service from the API which will also delete the compute node record in the DB and then restart the nova-compute service (which is not something we document at all) or (2) manually hacking the DB. So yeah we should probably allow changing this if the config value is non-default.","commit_id":"0a8559fada4d263f69690d17e9ac4ca721fab52b"},{"author":{"_account_id":11564,"name":"Chris Dent","email":"cdent@anticdent.org","username":"chdent"},"change_message_id":"58ced02d0370aba7b731f355108247ae9c7cd3ec","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":627,"context_line":"        # the _resource_change method think something changed when really it"},{"line_number":628,"context_line":"        # didn\u0027t."},{"line_number":629,"context_line":"        # TODO(mriedem): Will this break any scenarios where an operator is"},{"line_number":630,"context_line":"        # trying to *reset* the allocation ratios by changing config from"},{"line_number":631,"context_line":"        # non-0.0 back to 0.0? Maybe we should only do this if the fields on"},{"line_number":632,"context_line":"        # the ComputeNode object are not already set. For example, let\u0027s say"},{"line_number":633,"context_line":"        # the cpu_allocation_ratio config was 1.0 and then the operator wants"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_ab85485b","line":630,"range":{"start_line":630,"start_character":20,"end_line":630,"end_character":49},"updated":"2018-09-03 20:02:15.000000000","message":"Hmmm. I hope that doesn\u0027t happen. I would think that once you set allocation ratios you would then just set them for real.\n\nBut I guess certain types of reconfiguration (by e.g., ansible) might do something like that.\n\nGiven how buggy this bug is, I think fixing it the simple way, and waiting for the next bug is probably the right way to go.","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"062274678ea42fc4b3b0807823d3d41f2b523278","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":627,"context_line":"        # the _resource_change method think something changed when really it"},{"line_number":628,"context_line":"        # didn\u0027t."},{"line_number":629,"context_line":"        # TODO(mriedem): Will this break any scenarios where an operator is"},{"line_number":630,"context_line":"        # trying to *reset* the allocation ratios by changing config from"},{"line_number":631,"context_line":"        # non-0.0 back to 0.0? Maybe we should only do this if the fields on"},{"line_number":632,"context_line":"        # the ComputeNode object are not already set. For example, let\u0027s say"},{"line_number":633,"context_line":"        # the cpu_allocation_ratio config was 1.0 and then the operator wants"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_392dd994","line":630,"range":{"start_line":630,"start_character":20,"end_line":630,"end_character":49},"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_ab85485b","updated":"2018-09-04 16:09:26.000000000","message":"\u003e Given how buggy this bug is, I think fixing it the simple way, and waiting for the next bug is probably the right way to go.\n\nYes agree especially since I don\u0027t know if this *reset* behavior is a thing people actually do.","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"},{"author":{"_account_id":14070,"name":"Eric Fried","email":"openstack@fried.cc","username":"efried"},"change_message_id":"bcc6a90450ded736504eac4e03286d7d034ab346","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":636,"context_line":"        # Should we support that or treat these config options as \"sticky\" in"},{"line_number":637,"context_line":"        # that once you start setting them, you can\u0027t go back to the implied"},{"line_number":638,"context_line":"        # defaults by unsetting or resetting to 0.0? Sort of like how"},{"line_number":639,"context_line":"        # per-tenant quota is sticky once you change it in the API."},{"line_number":640,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":641,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":642,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_e33a80c2","line":639,"updated":"2018-08-31 19:21:19.000000000","message":"Is there anything magical about the default just because it\u0027s the default? Are we saying that [setting the config value to 0.0 in order to get an actual value of 16.0] used to work, but now instead if you wanted a value of 16.0 you would have to [set the config value to 16.0]? I\u0027m ... totally okay with that.\n\nIf the change in behavior really bothers us, I suppose we could add a release note? Though I\u0027m not sure how it would be worded.","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"},{"author":{"_account_id":7,"name":"Jay Pipes","email":"jaypipes@gmail.com","username":"jaypipes"},"change_message_id":"907de28eeff734ffd07777027c788152982faa9a","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":636,"context_line":"        # Should we support that or treat these config options as \"sticky\" in"},{"line_number":637,"context_line":"        # that once you start setting them, you can\u0027t go back to the implied"},{"line_number":638,"context_line":"        # defaults by unsetting or resetting to 0.0? Sort of like how"},{"line_number":639,"context_line":"        # per-tenant quota is sticky once you change it in the API."},{"line_number":640,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":641,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":642,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_04c3dbee","line":639,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_6455ef4f","updated":"2018-09-04 13:31:17.000000000","message":"@alex_xu: yep.","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"300a6ea8cc268cb342deb0bc5fd7431bf974d20c","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":636,"context_line":"        # Should we support that or treat these config options as \"sticky\" in"},{"line_number":637,"context_line":"        # that once you start setting them, you can\u0027t go back to the implied"},{"line_number":638,"context_line":"        # defaults by unsetting or resetting to 0.0? Sort of like how"},{"line_number":639,"context_line":"        # per-tenant quota is sticky once you change it in the API."},{"line_number":640,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":641,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":642,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_f95a01f0","line":639,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_6dcac44f","updated":"2018-09-04 16:15:41.000000000","message":"\u003e Yup, after thinking about this concern, my opinion is that we should also modify the three (CPU, mem and disk) config option helper by saying if operators want to unsetting the value, they should actually use for example 16.0 and not 0.0.\n\nDone: https://review.openstack.org/599670","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"},{"author":{"_account_id":5754,"name":"Alex Xu","email":"hejie.xu@intel.com","username":"xuhj"},"change_message_id":"f2bba89a65a775067542adc19a625e45230531ce","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":636,"context_line":"        # Should we support that or treat these config options as \"sticky\" in"},{"line_number":637,"context_line":"        # that once you start setting them, you can\u0027t go back to the implied"},{"line_number":638,"context_line":"        # defaults by unsetting or resetting to 0.0? Sort of like how"},{"line_number":639,"context_line":"        # per-tenant quota is sticky once you change it in the API."},{"line_number":640,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":641,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":642,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_6455ef4f","line":639,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_6dcac44f","updated":"2018-09-04 13:29:16.000000000","message":"have to say 0.0 is a confuse default value.","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"},{"author":{"_account_id":7166,"name":"Sylvain Bauza","email":"sbauza@redhat.com","username":"sbauza"},"change_message_id":"d2c5754d9717d8d355023166ad6369563110a792","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":636,"context_line":"        # Should we support that or treat these config options as \"sticky\" in"},{"line_number":637,"context_line":"        # that once you start setting them, you can\u0027t go back to the implied"},{"line_number":638,"context_line":"        # defaults by unsetting or resetting to 0.0? Sort of like how"},{"line_number":639,"context_line":"        # per-tenant quota is sticky once you change it in the API."},{"line_number":640,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":641,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":642,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_6dcac44f","line":639,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_766ce19b","updated":"2018-09-03 14:53:35.000000000","message":"Yup, after thinking about this concern, my opinion is that we should also modify the three (CPU, mem and disk) config option helper by saying if operators want to unsetting the value, they should actually use for example 16.0 and not 0.0.\n\nOnce this done, I think we could create a new change only for Stein (ie. not being backported) to modify the options default values to eg. 16.0 instead of 0.0\n\nThis way, the below would only be an upgrade verification that we could remove in the next cycle.","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"},{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"c0d7a9741d2e70c205c6e658a2cef466bf9ccbbf","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":636,"context_line":"        # Should we support that or treat these config options as \"sticky\" in"},{"line_number":637,"context_line":"        # that once you start setting them, you can\u0027t go back to the implied"},{"line_number":638,"context_line":"        # defaults by unsetting or resetting to 0.0? Sort of like how"},{"line_number":639,"context_line":"        # per-tenant quota is sticky once you change it in the API."},{"line_number":640,"context_line":"        for res in (\u0027cpu\u0027, \u0027disk\u0027, \u0027ram\u0027):"},{"line_number":641,"context_line":"            attr \u003d \u0027%s_allocation_ratio\u0027 % res"},{"line_number":642,"context_line":"            conf_alloc_ratio \u003d getattr(self, attr)"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":2,"id":"3f79a3b5_766ce19b","line":639,"in_reply_to":"3f79a3b5_e33a80c2","updated":"2018-09-01 23:18:02.000000000","message":"\u003e Are we saying that [setting the config value to 0.0 in order to get an actual value of 16.0] used to work, but now instead if you wanted a value of 16.0 you would have to [set the config value to 16.0]?\n\nYes that\u0027s what I\u0027m saying in the comment - but I don\u0027t know if anyone actually does that in real life. Alternatively you could delete the nova-compute service from the API which will delete the compute node record in the DB, and then restart nova-compute to re-create the provider with the empty config. That\u0027s a workaround if you really needed to reset to default and didn\u0027t want to set something in config, but setting config seems better than that workaround.\n\n\u003e If the change in behavior really bothers us, I suppose we could add a release note? Though I\u0027m not sure how it would be worded.\n\nYeah bauzas suggested a release note too and I wasn\u0027t sure what we\u0027d say, plus release notes likely won\u0027t be read at this level of detail for something we don\u0027t even know if people are doing it. If we document something in a release note, I\u0027d also want to put it in the config option help. I think it would basically say, \"If you change this to a non-default value, you cannot get back to the 0.0 default behavior for existing nodes unless you delete the nova-compute service resource via the REST API and then restart nova-compute on this host.\"","commit_id":"2588af87c862cfd02d860f6b860381e907b279ff"}],"nova/tests/unit/compute/test_resource_tracker.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":6873,"name":"Matt Riedemann","email":"mriedem.os@gmail.com","username":"mriedem"},"change_message_id":"c2c5431e40381b38b07c1f07975cdc85e1c3f254","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":1482,"context_line":"        self.assertRaises(exc.ComputeHostNotFound,"},{"line_number":1483,"context_line":"                          self.rt.get_node_uuid, \u0027foo\u0027)"},{"line_number":1484,"context_line":""},{"line_number":1485,"context_line":"    def test_copy_resources_no_update_allocation_ratios(self):"},{"line_number":1486,"context_line":"        \"\"\"Tests that a ComputeNode object\u0027s allocation ratio fields are"},{"line_number":1487,"context_line":"        not set if the configured allocation ratio values are default 0.0."},{"line_number":1488,"context_line":"        \"\"\""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":1,"id":"3f79a3b5_9171aeab","line":1485,"updated":"2018-08-30 22:14:08.000000000","message":"Also need a test where we have non-0.0 config values and make sure _copy_resources does set those.","commit_id":"0a8559fada4d263f69690d17e9ac4ca721fab52b"}]}